I don’t know if I should change the title to ‘does unbiased media exist?’
I just found out a Washington Post cartoonist quit after a Bezos satire she draw was rejected.
I was until today a reader of said newspaper, but after this kind of censorship I don’t know if I should keep reading it.
Note that I’m not looking for media sources that fabricate outrage either for the left or for the right or news sources whose business model is to editorialize titles to work people up. I’m just looking for unbiased media sources.
Maybe this was a stupid question: everyone is biased, or am I wrong?
You must log in or # to comment.
WaPo has been quite biased for quite some time. Rather than giving you a fish, another flawed source that’ll also likely fall victim to profit motive, I’d rather encourage you to glean what’s meritable from whatever sources you may encounter.
The tools that best help me do that are the book Manufacturing Consent and a course on logic. I found both online for free and completed them by myself. But, there’s been more value in subsequent group discussion. If you’ve an opportunity to learn as a group then favor it.
Looking at stuff from out of country can help.
CBC in Canada and the BBC in the UK both cover significant US news and aren’t going to be as overtly biased as for-profit US news sources.
I hadn’t heard of CBC. I consume a lot of BBC content. Also maybe check out ABC (Australia). These public broadcasters produce some great journalism IMO.
The Conservative Party of Canada wants to shutdown the CBC, so it’s gotta be good.
Everyone’s biased imo. I like propublica’s biases.
NPR isn’t too bad.
Firsthand experience is beyond words and super deep.
Convert to words. Consume words. Map words to your own experience.
It’s basically anime at that point.
Wapo has been justifying a genocide for a year but a Bezos cartoon is what made you reconsider?
None. All are biased. The best way is to read multiple news sources being aware of what their biases are.
I wouldn’t just say “all are biased”.
Some just outright make things up. (looking at you, Fox News entertainment)
I usually check Al Jazeera mainly for the war in Ukraine, Palestine, and Middle East in general.
No media is unbiased but they put effort in being objective.
I’m uninformed, feel free to feed me propaganda
AP, Routers, BBC, Al Jazeera.
Whenever I want to know the facts without any editorializing, I go for AP.
I like Verity (formerly Improve The News) which collates the facts of a news story from multiple sources, then gives you multiple spins on it.
i use bbc and routers
I get all my news through my router. (Also Reuters is pretty good.)
All are biased.
If there’s an event occurring within the last few days I’ll check AP and a couple other moderate/right sources to check/compare spin.
After a few days there’s usually a pod out on it from the left view. I like It Could Happen Here, Some More News, and Even More News. They’re incredibly well sourced, and are out in the open about their biases.
Even when there’s no editorializing there’s selection bias. That selection is due to capacity or the political viewpoint of the reporting. You won’t see stories that are less relevant to reporter/editor interest.
Most news organizations either are paid by the government or by some corporate stockholders (usually the rich).
It’s difficult to find unbiased news sources. There are some smaller ones, which are paid by private donations, but they often have inferior quality due to … appealing mostly to 18-y/o women who want “to make a change” and stuff (my opinion)
long story short, finding factual news sources is extremely difficult and i’ve basically given up on it. i can study physics to understand what is plausible and what is not, but i have no way to decide whether reporting on far-away events is biased or how much.
My local newspaper.
